From: Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
To: Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com>
cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre@alvh.no-ip.org>, pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org,
        Amit Langote <amitlangote09@gmail.com>
Subject: Re: \d with triggers: more than one row returned by a subquery used as an expression
In-reply-to: <163710.1642464874@sss.pgh.pa.us>
References: <20211217154356.GJ17618@telsasoft.com> <20211222210308.GD17618@telsasoft.com> <152507.1642456920@sss.pgh.pa.us> <20220118000824.GC14051@telsasoft.com> <163710.1642464874@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Comments: In-reply-to Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>
	message dated "Mon, 17 Jan 2022 19:14:34 -0500"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-ID: <168136.1642467008.1@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2022 19:50:08 -0500
Message-ID: <168137.1642467008@sss.pgh.pa.us>
Archived-At: <https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/168137.1642467008%40sss.pgh.pa.us>
Precedence: bulk

I wrote:
> Justin Pryzby <pryzby@telsasoft.com> writes:
>> Is there any reason why WITH ORDINALITY can't work ?
>> This is passing the smoke test.

> How hard did you try to break it?  It still seems to me that
> this can be fooled by an unrelated trigger with the same tgname.

Hmm ... no, it does work, because we'll stop at the first trigger
with tgparentid = 0, so unrelated triggers further up the partition stack
don't matter.  But this definitely requires commentary.  (And I'm
not too happy with burying such a complicated thing inside a conditional
inside a printf, either.)  Will see about cleaning it up.

			regards, tom lane